There is a distinct literary genre associated with imperial peripheries. In Britain, it is known as Greeneland, the world of Graham Greene — those dusty forgotten outposts where morality is suspended, the political illusions of the metropole are laid bare, and lost men are free to sin beyond judgement. It is a 20th-century genre, cognisant of evil and its consequences. Today, as our nightmares are once again filled with foreign wars, dubious casus belli, and mercenaries who operate beyond national flags, it is refreshing to return there, a place where cynicism breaks bread with truth.
Denis Johnson’s novel The Stars at Noon (1986) is the great American example of this form, a wet, hallucinatory junket through the jaws of hell that foreign interventions can become — in this case, 1984 Nicaragua, as CIA-backed Contras wage war on the Sandinista government. One of Johnson’s lesser-known works, the novel takes the form of an anti-travelogue narrated by an unnamed young American woman who will definitely not be documenting this unaesthetic excursion for Instagram.
The book begins with submachine guns in a grimy Managua McDonald’s, an American outpost patronised by horny officials and soldiers of the junta. It is here that we learn that our narrator may or may not be some kind of journalist, or at least aspires to be one, but for now is selling sex in an effort to acquire enough hard currency to purchase a flight out of Nicaragua.
This has led to her being sexually extorted by local officials, who are gratuitously taking advantage of her fallen position while promising to help. And she has fallen very far. Before this, we learn that she worked as a human rights observer with an organisation called Eyes for Peace. After bearing witness to the suffering of others, she quickly became disillusioned with this line of work — in her world, the word “humanitarian” has acquired a sinister meaning. Other exalted concepts — “justice”, “liberty”, “equality” — are equally scorned. “I’ll show you liberty and some of that other bullshit,” she tells one character.
We follow our young American to the bar at the InterContinental Hotel, where the assembled international press corps is drinking heavily and complaining about the lack of “bang bang”. It is better in Beirut, they all concur. But our narrator is similarly unimpressed with them: “As the cabdriver had understood they would be, several journalists were drinking here tonight, the usual bunch, every one the sort of person who really ought to be shot dead right away.”
It is in this sad hotel bar, among these war tourists, that our narrator first meets her love interest. He is a bland British consultant (“pudding-like and ghostly”), who works for an oil company. “Consultant” is another opaque, sinister-sounding vocation in these parts, and she implores him “not to go into detail” about his dealings. “The Englishman”, as she calls him, is remarkable only for his total lack of remarkability (elsewhere, she notes that he reminds her of a cloud, with a vaporous, forgettable face and white skin). And this is a central point of the book: the title comes from a line from an W.S. Merwin poem, “what we are looking for / in each other / is each other / the stars at noon / while the light worships its blind god”. This is a love story rooted in narcissistic idealisation and self-delusion, with the libidinous political tumult and tropical locale lending the affair a frisson it would not otherwise have. Back in London or New York, we imagine, these two might never give each other a second look.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI thought this was a very fine book review blended with some commentary on our present cultural moment. I particularly enjoyed: “an era in which writers are more invested in constructing the identity of a writer on social media than they are in writing.” As the dismal reception of much of Hollywood’s latest offerings suggest, there’s a big audience out there for stories about authentic human experience that aren’t thinly disguised ideological sermons. Perhaps some of those writers should get off social media and try to write something worth reading.
But they’re not really writers, just playing at being their idea of what a writer might be, without the remotest baseline of experience or talent which might propel them beyond a few ticks in their social media ‘output’.
In order to write, or undertake any meaningful creative act, one must first have lived. The world is full of ‘creatives’ who shy away from the kind of lived ecperience that might enable them to actually create anything worthwhile.
And a decade from now no one will read them or even remember their names.
I broadly agree with both of you, although I think the poetic recluse Emily Dickinson may stand as a counter-example to Steve’s claim.
I’m not sure that it does counter my point, which hinges on the word “lived”. Some poets reach quite an early peak without having had much experience of the world – and yet their internal experience allowed them to produce work which has stood the test of time. Another such is Gerard Manley Hopkins. The Bronte sisters also spring to mind in the longer form.
They were able to develop what’s sometimes referred to as a “hinterland” within their confines, whilst i’d argue that the social media focus of today’s young aspirational writers mitigates against that. I’ll grant that my claim may be seen as a generalisation, but nonetheless valid.
Steven Crane did not go to war.
I’m not sure that it does counter my point, which hinges on the word “lived”. Some poets reach quite an early peak without having had much experience of the world – and yet their internal experience allowed them to produce work which has stood the test of time. Another such is Gerard Manley Hopkins. The Bronte sisters also spring to mind in the longer form.
They were able to develop what’s sometimes referred to as a “hinterland” within their confines, whilst i’d argue that the social media focus of today’s young aspirational writers mitigates against that. I’ll grant that my claim may be seen as a generalisation, but nonetheless valid.
Steven Crane did not go to war.
Writers must be readers.
And a decade from now no one will read them or even remember their names.
I broadly agree with both of you, although I think the poetic recluse Emily Dickinson may stand as a counter-example to Steve’s claim.
Writers must be readers.
I also liked this review more than many, and the book sounds interresting enough to order a copy.
But they’re not really writers, just playing at being their idea of what a writer might be, without the remotest baseline of experience or talent which might propel them beyond a few ticks in their social media ‘output’.
In order to write, or undertake any meaningful creative act, one must first have lived. The world is full of ‘creatives’ who shy away from the kind of lived ecperience that might enable them to actually create anything worthwhile.
I also liked this review more than many, and the book sounds interresting enough to order a copy.
I thought this was a very fine book review blended with some commentary on our present cultural moment. I particularly enjoyed: “an era in which writers are more invested in constructing the identity of a writer on social media than they are in writing.” As the dismal reception of much of Hollywood’s latest offerings suggest, there’s a big audience out there for stories about authentic human experience that aren’t thinly disguised ideological sermons. Perhaps some of those writers should get off social media and try to write something worth reading.
“For that, he would undoubtedly be indicted by certain literary puritans today — for failing to make his female narrator sufficiently disempowered, or for writing in the voice of a woman at all.”
White male authors need to make it their business to write in female voices deliberately in order to offend the woke scum.
Unfortunately, the woke scum occupy the publishing houses so a white male author will find it difficult to get published as it is; let alone with deliberate provocation of the so-called “progressives”.
I read male writers almost exclusively now and they write females far better than women do. I think men just like women more.
The most popular, Jonathan Franzen .
The most popular, Jonathan Franzen .
Unfortunately, the woke scum occupy the publishing houses so a white male author will find it difficult to get published as it is; let alone with deliberate provocation of the so-called “progressives”.
I read male writers almost exclusively now and they write females far better than women do. I think men just like women more.
“For that, he would undoubtedly be indicted by certain literary puritans today — for failing to make his female narrator sufficiently disempowered, or for writing in the voice of a woman at all.”
White male authors need to make it their business to write in female voices deliberately in order to offend the woke scum.
” a tech-facilitated authoritarianism”. Might borrow that.
I detected an atmosphere captured by Le Carré’s Honorable Schoolboy in the Far East around the late Vietnam war time.
” a tech-facilitated authoritarianism”. Might borrow that.
I detected an atmosphere captured by Le Carré’s Honorable Schoolboy in the Far East around the late Vietnam war time.
Yes, another (albeit interesting) book review – has anyone else noticed that most of the articles on UnHerd (including by my favorite writers) are, essentially book reviews that try to make a point out of what the book says?
Yes, another (albeit interesting) book review – has anyone else noticed that most of the articles on UnHerd (including by my favorite writers) are, essentially book reviews that try to make a point out of what the book says?